Comment posted Possible weather disruption to Gourock ferry services 14th and 15th June by Robert Wakeham.
I’m disappointed in you Bill, you seem to be as obsessed with the past and as ignorant of current good practice as the rest of the ‘thumbs down brigade’ Do you really think that the boarding facilities of ferries built forty years ago are not worthy of comment?
I’m beginning to think that there’s a group of people here who really haven’t a clue what a good passenger ferry operation looks like, and this is really rather sad.
Ideally you’d all go off on a jaunt around Europe (starting in London and concentrating on Norway) to find out how the world beyond Dunoon operates.
The trouble is, unless you paid for yourselves, the traditional way of obtaining such a jaunt would be to serve in the SPT organisation, but there seems to have been ‘study tours’ by senior people in that outfit where transport infrastructure was about the last thing being studied. It’s not just the design of the boats inappropriate for the task, it’s the landing ‘arrangements’, and having different places controlled by different organisations should be high on the list for reform before new boats are procured. Unless there’s some sort of enlightened, committed and capable transport authority to bang heads together and really develop a service that will encourage customers rather than driving them away there’s not much hope, and I can see WF becoming the only ferry service of any description in the area.
Robert Wakeham also commented
- Ferryman, I don’t think you’re really interested in sensible debate.
- Ferryman, the gangways on the streakers were so bad that why shouldn’t I criticise them? You’re right that I only used the service once in a blue moon, but so what? You just don’t seem to be able to take valid comment – and look for excuses to discount it, but I really don’t understand why unless you think that you’re the only person entitled to comment on this ferry service.
If something clearly needs to be done in a different way in the future, why such reluctance to have open discussion about it? Your references to Michael Russell, to people wanting a reliable service, and to the existing service being unable to cope with summer weather, are in your mind linked to my comments? How?
- ‘The only purpose anyone seems to give for pontoons is to “improve” the existing service’.
No, Ferryman. Why do you think that they’re not relevant to the future of the service, with new boats?
Do you think the ‘current linkspan’ (one at each terminal) is suitable for passenger use as well as for the vehicle traffic that’s stated to be essential for these ferries – are you proposing mixed use?
At Gourock the linkspan is fine for the vehicle route through the terminal but hardly ideal for the pedestrian route for rail passengers.
You compare the behaviour of pontoons unfavourably with that of linkspans, but this isn’t true in reality – you seem to be keen to imagine disadvantages that don’t exist, and even introduce total red herrings – they have to be designed to be stout enough for the sea conditions, so what have easterly winds got to do with it? If the weather’s too bad for the boats to operate (and I don’t mean just the existing boats) then pontoons wouldn’t be in use. As for ‘the lady complained about the ride being too rough, would pontoons help, not at all’ – what have pontoons got to do with the ride being too rough? My point is that pontoons would make passenger access on and off the ferries much easier, and your assurance that you have absolutely nothing against pontoons is contradicted by your imagined objections to them. You seem very confused, but maybe this just reflects some basic conflicts between what’s best for vehicles and what’s best for people, as things stand – especially at Gourock.
- Bill, I can understand your determination not to get involved in the ferry debate again, given how much has been said previously, but I make no apologies for vigorously arguing my corner in the face of a good deal of abuse, ignorance and tunnel vision from people who don’t seem to want to discuss anything outside their own assumptions about the ferry service (mostly ‘Ferryman’ and Gus McKay) . When you ‘came back’ you called my arguments ‘increasingly tiresome and irrelevant’ and of course I object to that. I brought up the subject of pontoons and get harangued as if I’m the antichrist. That, to me, is not just ignorance, it’s real oafishness and you in particular are capable of better than that. People’s experience seems to be based on the performance of the ‘streakers’, but while these had decent passenger accommodation they had lousy boarding arrangements and the shore facilities – particularly the transfer to trains at Gourock – were poor.
I don’t know why your point that ‘passenger-only ferries don’t make money, vehicle carrying vessels do’ should prevent me arguing for better passenger facilities – whatever the economics, not everyone travels by car or bus and I’m clear in my mind that if Dunoon is to prosper there must be a decent passenger link. As I see it the vehicle link spans are fine for vehicles but – particularly at Gourock – are directly in conflict with the provision of passenger facilities. You can see what driving down the cost of passenger services is doing to the Gourock – Kilcreggan service, and on the Gourock – Dunoon route I don’t accept that the best value for money involves provision of vehicle ferries unless the existing facilities – as well as the boats – are recast to provide a really decent level of service. I suspect that this won’t happen until the government comes round to the idea of a transport authority to take over management of the Clyde ferries with the aim of improving integration – and showing real faith in the economic future of the area by fostering investment in every aspect of the services to bring them up to scratch. Both Cowal and the Rosneath peninsula demonstrate the need for this, and I don’t see either the Calmac group or SPT (as it stands) being up to the job.
- Innes: Agreed that there need to be adequate and properly qualified staff (and definitely not just the sort of phone ‘help points’ that you find at unstaffed railway stations), but to object to pontoons on the grounds that they’ll cost jobs compared with gangways is Luddite thinking – a ferry service shouldn’t be seen as a job creation programme. The sort of gangways that have to be laboriously manhandled into position on some Calmac services may be fine for jobs, but are labour intensive and a real anachronism in this day & age.
Recent comments by Robert Wakeham
- Minutes of today’s meeting of ‘Concerned Councillors’ Group
Perhaps Argyll should be reclassified from a local authority area to a semi-wilderness zone not suited to self-government, of a similar standing to the Northwest Territories in Canada; if that doesn’t work, then how about the Tribal Areas of Pakistan’s Northwest Frontier? – anarchic groups that continually disintegrate and morph into new allegiances, beyond rational control and inviting attack by pilotless rocket-firing drones controlled from outside the country’s borders. Attacks noisily condemned by a dis-functional central government, but secretly welcomed.
- CalMac geared up to start Campbeltown-Ardrossan ferry service on Thursday night
If indeed Calmac were ‘thrown a curve ball’ by the Scottish government then it doesn’t bode well for the future, if indeed the government is into cynical manipulation of public finances to enhance their popularity.
The trouble is, this would fit with the apparent cynical manipulation, by this government, of Argyll & Bute Council politics – and if this really is all in character then it reinforces my cynicism about politicians in general.
You can find some decent ones, in most parties, if you try – but anyone listening to Alex Salmond jousting with James Naughtie on BBC R4 ‘Today’, this morning, will have heard him claim that Denis Healey (whom I respected for his ability in government) has said that the Treasury deliberately underplayed the value of Scottish oil in years gone by to make independence seem less attractive.
A plague on the lot of them.
- Walsh to lead all but Lib Dems, Conservatives and George Freeman
I’m just wondering if this is a wild goose chase – barking up the wrong tree, so to speak – and it might be a creature of a different political colour altogether?
- Walsh to lead all but Lib Dems, Conservatives and George Freeman
Talking of Conservatives, and bearing in mind the ornithological wonders of this part of the world, has anyone yet spotted a swivel-eyed loon? – or is it an imaginary creature?
- First Minister’s choice not to condemn mob behaviour proves Farage point
Farage was in Edinburgh to raise the profile of UKIP – don’t underestimate wee Nige.
powered by SEO Super Comments